"THEAnti-Defamation
League has
committed defamation. There is no other conclusion
to be reached after reading its new report, The
Religious Right: The Assault on Tolerance and
Pluralism in America. It is sad that an
organization with a proud history of fairness
should have descended to this kind of character
assassination and name calling."

"IN
MY twelve Senate years I
worked with many of the 'Religious Right.' They
were active in the cause of Soviet Jewry (many
Pentecostals and other Christians couldn't leave
the Soviet Union either). They were fervent
supporters of the State of Israel and we worked
together often. Among the leadership of
Conservative Christians I never experienced even a
hint of anti-Semitism. Indeed, it was quite the
opposite -- I am Honorary Vice-Chairman of the
ADL.
I am proud of that -- But in this instance I
strongly disagree. From all my experience I know
their report to be ill-founded. Regretably it will
do more harm than good."

Former U.S. Senator Rudy Boschwitz,
Honorary Vice-Chairman, ADL (2)

Introduction

On June 9, 1994, the Anti-Defamation
League of B'nai B'rith, an organization created to
fight defamation, released a report that alleges -- with
shoddy research and threadbare scholarship -- that
politically active people of faith pose a threat to the
survival of American constitutional democracy. The ADL
accuses numerous religious conservative organizations and
leaders of anti-Semitism and bigotry. In so doing, the ADL
itself has committed defamation. The ADL's new definition of
"intolerance" apparently is disagreement with its liberal
politics.

The ADL report is filled with fabrications, half-truths,
innuendo and guilt by association that are reminiscent of
the political style practiced by Joseph McCarthy in
the 1950s.

Persons of impeccable character and reputation are
smeared for dubious reasons or for no reason at all. This
style of politics is beneath the dignity of any organization
that claims to be dedicated to fighting bigotry.

The response to the ADL report has been dismay from Jews
and Christians alike. "Politically active Christians, the
ADL concludes, are -- well, 'extremist,' 'bogus,'
'conspiratorial,' 'fevered,' 'phony,'...and yes, 'fervent.'
Protestant evangelicals are simply de trop, an object
of condescension and prejudice," observed William
Kristol, former chief of staff to Vice President Dan
Quayle. (3)

Columnist Don Feder of the Boston Herald
calls the report "an attempted political assassination."
Feder adds, "Instead of debating the issues like a
gentleman, it stoops to implications of anti-Semitism to
discredit a legitimate voice in the values debate."
(4)

Beth Gilinsky of the Jewish Action Alliance calls
the ADL report "a plainly partisan smear campaign against
traditional Christians who energetically -- and quite
legitimately -- advocate what they believe are important
moral and social values." She concludes that although
"Jewish-Christian friendship will survive the onslaught from
the ADL, we are getting rather tired sweeping up after
repeated ADL fiascos." (5)

This report specifically addresses those portions of the
ADL document concerning the Christian Coalition. First, we
will briefly examine the shoddy nature of the ADL's
pseudo-research, and the report's heavy reliance on sources
of questionable veracity. Second, we will discuss how the
Christian Coalition really operates and discuss our true
agenda of pluralistic democracy, nonpartisanship and
inclusion. We also will discuss in detail the Coalition's
nonpartisan voter guides and organizational structure and
purposes.

THE ADL claims its report was the
culmination of nine months of research, but it bears none of
the signs of a serious research report. It is virtually
devoid of specific references to resource materials.
(6) The reader is left to simply take it on faith that
the ADL's most damning charges are true, which they are not.
In fact, much of the ADL's report is simply a retread of
materials (some over a decade old) from groups like People
for the American Way, Americans United for the Separation of
Church and State, the Institute for First Amendment Studies
and other groups that long have had political axes to grind
against religious conservatives. (7) Most
disturbing, the ADL never contacted the Christian Coalition
to get its response to their unfounded charges, nor did the
ADL try to ascertain the accuracy of many of the quotations
used in their report. This is particularly disturbing
considering the fact that many of the groups and persons
attacked have been longstanding friends of the Jewish
community, the State of Israel and the ADL.

In 1993, in seeking to settle charges that it had
violated the privacy of certain individuals, the ADL sought
to avoid legal liability by claiming that it enjoyed
"journalistic status," making it "similar to any newspaper,
magazine, or television station." (8) If so, then the
ADL has violated even the most basic principles of ethical
journalism.

Had the Christian Coalition or its leadership been
contacted for clarification, many of the errors in the
report would have been corrected. Instead, the report is
filled with gross inaccuracies of fact. Quotations are
listed without attribution, while others are listed
(incredibly) as coming from the "library of People for the
American Way." A quotation from Pat Robertson on
church-state separation has no source listed at all.
(9) Of 28 quotations attributed to Paul Weyrich,
founder of the Washington-based Free Congress Foundation, 22
have no source for the quote. (10)

BASIC BIOGRAPHICAL errors abound.
For instance, the ADL report says that Christian Coalition
executive director Ralph Reed, Jr. once worked as a
"campaign staffer for Georgia Rep. Newt Gingrich,
former Georgia State Sen. Mack Mattingly and Sen.
Jesse Helms of North Carolina." (11) Reed
never has been employed on the campaign staffs of any of
these individuals. He never was employed by Rep. Newt
Gingrich in any capacity. He worked for Students For
America, an independent organization, during the 1984 Senate
race in North Carolina. He has never been employed by
Senator Jesse Helms. He served as an intern for Mack
Mattingly in the U.S. Senate in the summer of 1981.
Mattingly was a U.S. Senator, not a state Senator, from
Georgia.

Reed never made the comment attributed to him by the ADL
calling for "a country once again governed by
Christians-'."(12) Indeed, when asked on the NBC Meet
the Press program in 1992 whether he believed America was a
"Christian nation," Reed disagreed.

"I think the only difference that I would have
with it is -- and I should probably preface this by
telling you that I began my political career as the
executive director of the first Jewish national chairman
of the College Republicans in the history of the
Republican party -- I do think that you have to
acknowledge the role that Jews have played and will
continue to play, and I think there's a commonality among
Jews and Christians on a lot of issues because again,
ultimately it's a faith that I think has a lot of common
values."(13)

It is not as though adequate documentation of Dr. Reed's
views was unavailable to the ADL. As recently as February of
this year, the New York Times news service carried an
extensive profile that noted, "At the same time, the
coalition is making overtures to minorities and Jewish
leaders, hoping to bring some diversity to what has so far
been a remarkably homogeneous movement." Arthur Kropp
of People for the American Way added, "I disagree with
[Reed] wholeheartedly, but I don't detect a mean
spiritedness in him that you detect in other leaders.
There's a political astuteness, perseverance, and
intelligence."(14)

The ADL also misspells the name of the Coalition's
Director of Legislative Affairs, Marshall Wittmann.
This could not have been a typographical error, as
Wittmann's name appears incorrectly spelled throughout the
report. Cursory fact-checking should have caught this
error. (15)

So poorly researched is the report that views attributed
to columnist Robert Novak are based on a quotation so
badly lifted out of context that its meaning is distorted.
In arguing that a "grim" Paul Weyrich, a Washington
pro-family strategist, is somehow tied to anti-Semitic
individuals, the report quotes Novak as saying, "I am
supposed to be the Prince of Darkness, but Paul's the only
person who's so tough that he gets hate mail from Mother
Theresa."(16) This statement was made by Mr. Novak at
a roast in Weyrich's honor held in Washington, DC, on April
1, 1991. Clearly, the remark is offered in jest -- but it is
lifted out of its proper context by the ADL to distort the
true meaning.(17)

THE ADL report repeatedly suggests
that leaders and organizations in the pro-family movement
are guilty of anti-Semitism.

Stung by criticism from within the Jewish community, the
ADL is backpedaling, and now denies making the accusation.
For example, in a response to an earlier Christian Coalition
correction of its many factual errors, the ADL weakly
claimed, "the ADL does not call the Christian Coalition or
any other religious right organization anti-Semitic."
(18)

Has the ADL not read its own report? It alleges that
"movement leaders have demonstrated a disturbing
insensitivity to Jews and Jewish concerns" (p. 2), that its
agenda expresses "anti-Jewish and extremist sentiments" (p.
2), that its leaders make "public anti-Jewish
pronouncements" (p. 21), that its rhetoric is "reminiscent
of traditional anti-Semitic thinking" (p. 22), that its
literature is peppered with "anti-Jewish nuggets" (p. 24),
that its leaders have "issued a number of pronouncements
antagonistic toward Jews" (p. 42), that the movement has
been "tolerant of anti-Semitism" (p. 42), that its
publications echo "evangelical anti-Judaism" (p. 43), and
that its groups conspire with "the nation's leading
anti-Semitic propaganda organization" (p. 97).
(19)

Had the ADL simply contacted the Christian Coalition and
other groups defamed by the report, extensive documentation
could have been provided to demonstrate our wholehearted and
steadfast opposition to anti-Semitism and bigotry.

In January 1994, Pat Robertson received the
highest honor of the Christians' Israel Public Action
Campaign at a Jewish-Christian solidarity rally in
Washington, DC. At the awards ceremony, Robertson stated,
"Those of us who are evangelicals say to those of you who
are Jewish, we are your friends. We stand with you and
however easy it is, or however difficult it is, you can
count on us as your friends, your supporters and your
compatriots in a struggle to bring forth the fulfillment of
that prophecy, and to make this a better world for all of us
to live in." (20)

Robertson also told the Los Angeles Times in 1993,
"I am convinced on the political scene that the evangelical
churches, the Catholic churches, the Orthodox Jewish people,
all of us, will work together." Ralph Reed was quoted in the
same story as saying, "We're working very closely with
various conservative and orthodox rabbis to try to build a
friendship and cooperation across theological lines on
family and moral issues." (21)

Robertson has been a major contributor to the United
Jewish Appeal, has donated large sums to Jewish charities in
Jerusalem, and visited the ADL offices in 1985 to meet with
its board of directors. At that meeting, Robertson held
hands with then-executive director Nathan Perlmutter
and the entire board of directors and the group prayed
together for an end to anti-Semitism and intolerance in
America. Those present at the meeting report that many were
moved to tears.

In January 1994, Ralph Reed visited Israel on a tour
sponsored by the Jerusalem Post. He met with former
Prime Minister Yitzak Shamir, members of the Knesset,
government officials, and the mayor of Jerusalem. Reed's
trip was undertaken with the assistance of Jewish leaders in
the United States to underscore the Christian Coalition's
steadfast support for Israel and Jewish concerns.
(22)

ONE OF THE most disturbing aspects
of the ADL's report is its propensity to lift words out of
context so as to distort their original meaning. It does so
with reference to the irresponsible charge of
anti-Semitism.

Citing an editorial in the Christian American newspaper,
the ADL argues that the Christian Coalition believes that
"Jews 'both killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets,
and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are
contrary to all men' (1 Thessalonians 2:15)." The ADL
dismissively acknowledges that this quotation from the New
Testament appeared in an editorial denouncing anti-Semitism,
but refers to it as "typical of evangelical
anti-Judaism." (23)

In fact, the editorial (titled "Anti-Semitism in the
Church") cited the above-mentioned verse from the Bible as
an example of Scripture twisted by anti-Semites in the past
to justify their bigotry. The editorial went on to say that
"the place of the Church is to restore, not to condemn." The
column concludes, "Our editorial position has been and
remains clear, consistent, and Biblical: we support the
State of Israel and we oppose anti-Semitism."
(24)

In the same issue of Christian American, another
statement condemned bigotry against Jews. "Anti-Semitism is
a serious and dangerous thing to take root and grow. Please
do not give aid to this monster, and allow it to grow any
further." (25)

MANY IN THE Jewish community have
reacted with disbelief to the ADL's assault on Christian
leaders who have been among their best friends in the United
States. Midge Decter and Elliot Abrams both
have begun efforts to refute the biased report by the ADL
through newspaper advertisements. Former U.S. Senator
Rudy Boschwitz, an honorary vice-chairman of the ADL,
has written a letter distancing himself from the report.

"In my 12 Senate years, I worked with many of
the 'Religious Right.' They were very active in the cause
of Soviet Jewry (many Pentecostals and other Christians
couldn't leave the Soviet Union either). They were
fervent supporters of the State of Israel, and we worked
together often. Among the leadership of conservative
Christians I never experienced even a hint of
anti-Semitism. Indeed, it was quite the opposite-I am
honorary vice-chairman of the ADL. I am proud of that-but
in this instance I strongly disagree. From all my
experience I know their report to be ill-founded.
Regretably it will do more harm than good." (26)

Marshall Breger of the Heritage Foundation has
noted that the report "inferred that the religious right is
anti-Semitic, and I don't see how you can make that claim on
the record." Marshall Wittmann, director of legislative
affairs at the Christian Coalition, says, "This
[report] was liberalism and not Judaism speaking."
He adds, "It's quite ironic that the ADL, despite all the
various anti-Semites out there, would go after people for
their political views." (27) Wittmann, who has
traveled extensively speaking to Christian Coalition
seminars nationwide, recounts that he has "never encountered
a whiff of anti-Semitism" among its members. (28)

"The greatest friends the State of Israel has in America
are the Christian conservatives," said Herbert
Zweibon, chairman of Americans for a Safe Israel. "And
[the ADL] is telling this community to get lost?"
Zweibon added that the ADL, founded in 1913 to combat
anti-Semitism, had "gone off track" and "adopted a liberal
political agenda that has nothing to do with its mission."
The ADL, he concluded, "does not represent the views of most
American Jews." (29)

THE ADL frequently resorts to the
very same kinds of guilt-by-association lines of argument
patented by virulent anti-Semites. One of the most egregious
examples occurs in its allegation that Pat Robertson and
Christian Coalition board member Billy McCormack gave
aid and support to former klansman and neo-Nazi David
Duke's Louisiana senatorial bid in 1990 and his
gubernatorial bid in 1991. The allegation is not true.

The report says McCormack helped to table a 1990 censure
motion against Duke in the Louisiana Republican Central
Committee, implying that McCormack supported Duke's racist
views. (30) This is inaccurate.

Rhett Davis, who served as Congressman Clyde
Holloway's campaign coordinator in the 1991
gubernatorial campaign, says the following about McCormack's
role:

"Months before Congressman Holloway formally announced
his candidacy (though David Duke had already announced), Mr.
Billy McCormack of Shreveport contacted me on numerous
occasions expressing his strong feeling that we needed to
convince Congressman Holloway to run because no other
candidate was acceptable.

Mr. McCormack and his friends statewide began a
concentrated effort to help our campaign. Mr. McCormack was
very effective, and ultimately provided the margin of
victory for Holloway at the Republican State Convention."
(31)

Davis also noted that McCormack brought Robertson to
Louisiana to campaign against Duke in October 1991, and
Robertson appeared in Baton Rouge, Lake Charles, and
Shreveport at fundraisers for Holloway. (The trip was paid
for by the Holloway for Governor campaign and Robertson
appeared in his capacity as a private citizen.)

"Additionally," Davis continued, "please note that the
effort to kill a move to censure Duke was actually led by
the anti-Duke forces, fearing such a move would not hurt
him, and might indeed backfire like other, similar
moves." (32) Other press accounts have similarly
noted that the resolution was tabled to "deprive Duke of
additional publicity." (33)

In November 1991, after Clyde Holloway (the favored
candidate of religious conservatives) failed to make the
run-off election for Governor, pro-family activists faced a
dilemma. Edwards was an advocate of legalized gambling,
liberalized pornography laws, and abortion. Duke -- though
conservative on these issues -- held anti-Semitic and racist
views that are anathema to religious conservatives.

How did religious conservatives react to this dilemma? In
the ADL's green-spectacled fantasy, "Robertson displayed
indifference to Duke's racist record, despite the fact that
the national Republican Party had repudiated and condemned
the arch-bigot more than a year earlier." The ADL report
gravely intones that Robertson "never denounced Duke during
Duke's subsequent Louisiana gubernatorial bid." (34)
That is an irresponsible statement for which the ADL should
issue a retraction and an apology.

On November 13, 1991, Robertson denounced Duke on his 700
Club program before the run-off between Edwards and Duke.
His words were unambiguous:

"You don't get converted one day and run for
governor the next. And especially the fact that there was
apparently a falsehood about his-service -- it does not
exist, apparently. And furthermore, he claims to be a
member of a church that doesn't exist as well. There are
a few little inconsistencies. Plus there's some really
bad stuff in his background. And it's very dangerous in
America to foster hate, and racial hatred, hatred of
Jews, bigotry -- that kind of thing. It is something we
just don't need in this country." (35)

Duke lost a campaign which he had led in many polls just
weeks prior to the election. Many observers noted that
Robertson's statement -- strategically timed a few days
before the run-off for maximum impact -- might have made the
difference by depressing Duke's support among white
evangelical voters. Many other organizations and leaders
adopted a more low-profile tactic in opposing Duke.
(36) But Robertson boldly and publicly spoke out.
Instead of praising Robertson for being the most prominent
evangelical Christian figure in America to denounce Duke and
prevent his election, the ADL smeared him with a
falsehood.

THE ADL is obsessed with the notion that Christian
conservatives engage in so-called "stealth" activities that
disguise their agenda. It relies heavily on bizarre theories
like those propagated by People for the American Way and
Skipp Porteous, a Massachusetts-based
conspiracist-cum-propagandist who specializes in spreading
falsehoods and innuendo about religious conservatives.

By combining forces with paranoid conspiracists on the
left, the ADL suggests that the distribution of nonpartisan
voter guides by Christian organizations amounts to a
subversion of democracy. The report asserts that "the policy
of Robertson's Christian Coalition has often been to hide
its election activity." (37) It falsely claims that
the Coalition "acknowledges having used [stealth
tactics]." It compares volunteers in churches who
educate voters with "Tammany's ward heelers and the old
Democratic machine in Chicago." (38)

The ADL report asserts, "The Coalition participated in
the ground-breaking November 1990 elections in San Diego
County in which 60 of 88 candidates associated with
religious right groups were elected to office -- an event
that came to be known among the religious right and its
critics as the 'San Diego model.' " (39)

This statement is false. The Christian Coalition played
no part in the 1990 San Diego school board elections. At the
time, the Coalition barely had been in existence a year. It
had no state affiliate in California and no chapter in the
San Diego area. The Coalition neither practices nor endorses
the "stealth tactics" the ADL claims.

Contacted by the Los Angeles Times after the
election, Ralph Reed of the Christian Coalition made it
clear that his organization had nothing to do with the
campaign. He noted that while the tendency of candidates to
campaign in churches might have been an effective strategy,
it probably would backfire if the candidates had not gained
broad support for their views in the electorate.

Reed made these remarks in his capacity as a political
analyst. He did not condone, endorse, or participate in the
strategy. The Times misquoted Dr. Reed, a fact that
the ADL could have discovered with a more thorough search of
newspaper accounts on the subject. (40)

If the 1990 San Diego School Board races are a "model,"
as the ADL alleges, what were they a model for? The fact is
that this strategy failed in San Diego -- many of the
candidates who used them were defeated in 1992 -- and it
never has been replicated again.

The ADL report fails to mention a single other community
in the nation where the strategy has been used. It alludes
to an undocumented charge by Skipp Porteous that such a
strategy was undertaken in Williamsville, New York, but
provides no evidence and names not one candidate who
employed them. (41) In fact, the incident in
Williamsville never happened. Jeff Baran, executive director
of the Christian Coalition in New York, made this clear. "I
can assure you that, while I have had a few conversations
with Porteous in the past, none have ever contained talk of
running candidates of any kind, let alone 'stealth'
candidates. As is our policy, we have not engaged in
partisan politics in Williamsville or anywhere in New
York."(42) Apparently San Diego was not a "model" at
all, just a threadbare scare tactic whipped up by conspiracy
theorists like Skipp Porteous and People for the American
Way.

THE ADL seeks to tar the name of
Christian Coalition by finding the organization guilty of
commiting democracy. Through nonpartisan voter education
efforts, Christian Coalition informs voters where candidates
stand on a broad range of issues, and encourages voters to
go to the polls and cast their ballots for the candidate of
their choice.

Christian Coalition leaders have repeatedly disavowed
so-called "stealth tactics." They always have been
accessible to the press, open to the public, and have
pursued a policy of honesty and rectitude in their voter
education activities.

Ralph Reed told the Washington Times, "We don't
encourage in any way people to run for office at any level
and misrepresent their position on any issue. We believe
pro-family candidates should run unapologetically on who
they are and what they believe because the public shares
their viewpoint." (43)

In an appearance on CNN's Crossfire, Reed specifically
denounced the so-called stealth strategy:

Reed: We're working on behalf of choice
in education.We're working to increase the standard
deduction for children. We're working to decrease the tax
burden on the American family. It's a mainstream agenda
for a mainstream America. Eighty percent of the American
people want prayer in school, 75 percent are opposed to
abortion as a form of birth control, and two out of three
want choice in education.

Sununu: Ralph, let me ask you this. If those
statistics are valid, and I think they are, then why the
stealth candidate strategy that you're getting criticized
about?

Reed: We don't, John. We don't encourage that.
We don't teach it. We don't promote it. What we think is
that, because our values are held by the vast majority of
Americans, go out there and articulate what you stand
for, and you'll draw the people to you. That's what
Ronald Reagan did, and that's what we want to
do. (44)

Coalition founder Pat Robertson has been equally clear:
"People can say anything they want to, but it's not the
policy of the Christian Coalition nationally to hide
anything. We want to bring out the truth, not hide it. We
want to know what people stand for." (45)

"WE DO not advocate
electing officials by depressing voter turnout or taking
advantage of historically low voter participation. Some
have inaccurately charged that religious conservatives
hide their religious affiliation, conducting "stealth"
campaigns in which they eschew public forums and campaign
exclusively in churches. The opposite is true. The
Christian Coalition, for example, distributes millions of
nonpartisan voter guides that inform voters on where all
the candidates stand.We want a more open airing of who
the candidates are and what they believe. Pro-family
candidates win at the ballot box because of their views,
not in spite of them. They are elected precisely because
of who they are and what they believe." (46)

The New York City Mode

If the ADL was looking for the real model of Christian
Coalition activity, it would turn to the place where ADL's
headquarters is located: New York City. In 1993, Queens
school board member Mary Cummins led a protest
movement against then-New York City School Chancellor
Joseph Fernandez' imposition of the "Rainbow
Curriculum," a multi-cultural course that included
instruction on the gay lifestyle to students as young as six
years old.

A local Christian Coalition chapter was organized,
coincidentally, about the same time Cummins raised her
voice. The Coalition's New York City coordinator made
contact with Cummins, and over the next two months the
Coalition, in cooperation with the Roman Catholic
Archdiocese of New York, The Congress Of Racial Equality
(CORE), The National Committee For the Furtherance of Jewish
Education, and the Family Defense Council, supported her
reform efforts by distributing 550,000 nonpartisan voter
guides in 1,300 churches and synagogues.

Catholics, Hispanics and Jews joined the Christian
Coalition to distribute more than 500,000 nonpartisan voter
guides prior to the New York City School Board races. In
addition to church and synagogue distribution, Christian
Coalition voter guides were passed out at union halls,
polling places and family events. The guides informed voters
where 540 school board candidates stood on a broad range of
issues, including school choice, voluntary prayer, merit pay
for teachers and parental rights. The guides endorsed no
candidates and were used for voter education. In a
far-reaching show of support, Cardinal John O'Connor allowed
the distribution of voter guides in 300 Catholic churches, a
move that opened the door to ongoing Catholic/evangelical
cooperation.

As a result of Christian Coalition's voter education
campaign, voter turnout reached the highest level in 20
years. Approximately 450,000 voters went to the polls, and
60 percent of 130 pro-family candidates won election. Ten
city school boards had solid pro-family majorities. Among
the new board members: Linda Garcia, a Hispanic
mother who won election in Manhattan's Lower East Side.
Cummins and her allies were re-elected in Brooklyn.
Fernandez was removed from his post. (47)

The Coalition's efforts in New York were the subject of
ongoing press coverage from the beginning, and virtually
every significant development was reported in detail. The
Coalition held numerous news conferences in New York during
the campaign to announce its activities. Indeed, when the
New York Times and the New York Post listed
which candidates they preferred in the contests, they did so
based on information derived from the Coalition's
well-documented voter guide. (48) So much for
"stealth."

Reed told the New York Times during the campaign:
"We're simply encouraging people of faith, of all religious
traditions, including people of the Jewish and Roman
Catholic faiths, to be informed voters." (49)

SEEKING MORE fodder for its
conspiracy grist mill, the ADL repeats the tired and false
accusation that the "1992 Pennsylvania Christian Coalition's
'County Action Plan' directed" members to "never mention the
name Christian Coalition in Republican circles."
(50)

To state the obvious, Christian Coalition's activities
within the GOP are a matter of public knowledge, especially
given extensive news coverage of the last several years.
With Democratic consultant Bob Beckel calling
politically active evangelicals "Nazis," Mark Shields
referring to them as the "American equivalent of Shiite
Muslims," and Jocelyn Elders attacking them, it is
difficult to see how the ADL can think that anyone is
unaware of Christian involvement in the Republican
party.

In fact, the manual the ADL cites does not exist. The
"County Action Plan" was a draft prepared by a local
volunteer. It was submitted to the national office and
rejected as inconsistent with the Coalition's policy of
openness and inclusion.

As Ralph Reed directed in a letter on October 7, 1992, to
the executive director of the Pennsylvania chapter:

"There are several problems with the manual. It
directs Christian Coalition members not to mention their
affiliation with the Christian Coalition in party
circles. That is not our policy.This manual, in its
current form, does not have the authorization or
imprimatur of the Christian Coalition. Please retrieve
all copies." (51)

The ADL need only have contacted the Christian Coalition
and its staff would have gladly provided a copy of the
letter. As it is, the ADL has repeated a false allegation
about a manual that does not exist. In fact, the ADL barely
mentions the legitimate and extensive Christian Coalition
training materials, such as its 256-page Leadership Manual,
which states the official policy of the organization.

Indeed, the Leadership Manual clearly urges pro-family
citizens to be open, honest and up front about their views
and beliefs:

"First, do not limit your campaign to just
churches and the Christian community. As a supporter of
family values, your positions on issues affecting the
family are the same as a majority of the voting public.
Do not be shy in declaring that your stands on the issues
are based on principle."

"Do not use so-called 'stealth' tactics. In the past,
some candidates have focused their campaigns on the
churches and have not reached out to the general
electorate. In the long run, this strategy is
unsuccessful.Working in the churches alone will not
result in lasting success." (52)

CHRISTIAN COALITION'S
get-out-the-vote efforts are nonpartisan, contrary to the
ADL's assertions. The ADL repeats partisan claims by the
Democratic National Committee, which recently has launched
an orchestrated campaign of bigotry against people of faith
in the political arena. It mentions specious complaints that
the DNC has filed with Federal Election Commission. It fails
to mention that both the FEC and the IRS have found the
Christian Coalition's nonpartisan voter guides in full
compliance with the law.

The ADL conveniently ignores the fact that every
complaint filed by the Democratic Party against the
Coalition has been resolved in favor of the Christian
Coalition, most notably a 1990 complaint that advertisements
opposing taxpayer-funding of pornography constituted
"express advocacy" on behalf of specific candidates. The FEC
found that the advertisements were entirely consistent with
the Christian Coalition's status as a nonpartisan issues
organization. (53)

The ADL also fails to mention the fact that the Coalition
has engaged in voter education activities in a number of
Democratic races. For example, in the spring of 1994 in
Houston, Texas, the Coalition distributed voter guides in a
campaign in which Beverly Clark, an African-American,
pro-life Democrat, ran in a congressional primary. "The
Christian Coalition distributed nonpartisan voter guides in
over 100 black churches and made thousands of nonpartisan
get-out-the-vote calls to African-American voters from
grassroots phone banks." (54) Clark forced Ken
Bentsen, nephew of the Treasury secretary and former
Texas senator, into a run-off.

A voter guide distributed for the April 12 Democratic
run-off listed Clark's and Bentsen's stands (labeled
"supports" or "opposes") on ten public policy issues. The
answers were provided to the Coalition in response to a
candidate survey. Those issues were: "Increased income
taxes; balanced budget amendment; abortion-on-demand;
taxpayer funding of abortion; voluntary prayer in schools;
mandatory sentences for violent crimes; homosexuals in the
military; parental choice in education (vouchers); federal
government control of health care; 'workfare' requiring
able-bodied welfare recipients to work or get job training."
(55) The Coalition distributed a similar voter guide
in a Mississippi Democratic congressional primary in
1994.

In Cincinnati, Ohio in 1993, pro-family activists
supported Charles Winburn, an African-American pastor
of the Kingdome Church, in his run for the city council.
Winburn, a registered Democrat, graduated from a Christian
Coalition training school and campaigned for welfare reform
and school choice. (56)

THE COALITION'S 1994 Congressional
Scorecard, which lists Senators' and Representatives' votes
on a wide range of issues affecting families, makes no
distinctions based upon party affiliation. Representative
Charles Stenholm, (D-TX) scored a 100-percent rating
on the Christian Coalition Scorecard. Representative Pete
Geren, (D-TX) scored a 93- percent rating, as did
Representative Gene Taylor, (D-MS). Some of the
Democrats who have spoken at Christian Coalition events in
recent years include: state Representative Roger Byrd
(D-GA), Duval County (FL) School Board member Stan
Jordan, Beverly Clark, Charles Winburn, and State
Representative Woody Jenkins (D-LA). (57)

A number of other Democrats received high ratings on the
Congressional Scorecard. Sen. Richard Shelby (D-AL),
for instance, agreed with Coalition positions on 71 percent
of the surveyed votes. Representative Jimmy Hayes
(D-LA) scored 86 percent. Representative Sonny
Montgomery (D-MS) rated 71 percent, as did
Representative William Lipinski (D-IL).
Representative Matthew McHugh (D-NY) had a 93-percent
rating.

The 1994 Congressional Scorecard clearly states that the
listing of these votes on issues affecting the family does
not imply an endorsement for office or a commentary on the
personal faith of the elected official. "This Scorecard is
for informational purposes and is not intended to influence
the outcome of any election," the Scorecard reads.
"Christian Coalition does not advocate the election or
defeat of any candidate, and does not endorse any political
party. Scores in this Scorecard are not to be taken as a
commentary on the personal faith of individual members of
Congress. The information in this Scorecard is provided as a
tool to help you more effectively lobby your Congressman and
two Senators on issues before the 103rd Congress."
(59)

The Coalition's Scorecard and voter guides are little
different from the informational ratings issued by the
AFL-CIO, Americans for Democratic Action, American
Conservative Union and numerous other organizations. The
Coalition simply provides to voters -- of all political
persuasions -- what they richly deserve: reference tools
that show how their elected representatives in government
stand on issues of concern to families.

THE ADL complains that Coalition
members play a major role in some state and local party
organizations because they are the most energetic
participants. What is wrong with citizens taking part in the
political process? The ADL takes issue with religious
conservatives who are simply exercising their rights of
citizenship.

The Christian Coalition's Leadership Manual provides
members with nuts-and-bolts information on the electoral
process, from how to organize a local chapter and
requirements for Christian Coalition affiliation to how to
conduct a voter canvass.

The Coalition's purposes, as outlined in the manual, are
as follows:

To represent Christians before local councils, state
legislatures and the U.S. Congress.

To train Christians for effective political
action.

To inform Christians of timely issues and
legislation.

To speak out in the public arena and the media.

To protest anti-Christian bigotry. (60)

"Your job as a Christian Coalition leader is to identify
the Christian vote and get it to the polls," the manual
says. (61) In this sense, the Coalition's mission is
no different from the League of Women Voters, the National
Organization for Women, NARAL, the AFL-CIO, or Jesse
Jackson's Rainbow Coalition, which has registered
hundreds of thousands of African-Americans to vote.

The Coalition's policy stances are rooted in faith -- as
were America's founders, who spoke of the people of this
nation as being endowed by their "Creator" with "certain
inalienable rights." As Reed said on NBC's Meet the Press:
"The apostle Paul told the early Christians to render unto
Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to exercise their
civic responsibility. And what we're saying is that in a
democracy, when you render unto the government that which is
due it, that means your vote, your informed participation
and your involvement." (62)

The ADL apparently regards grassroots democracy as a
threat to, in its words, "tolerance and pluralism." In fact,
the Coalition and the ADL simply disagree on public policy
issues. The Coalition does not support taxpayer-funded
abortion as a form of birth control. Neither do 87 percent
of the American people, according to a recent survey. But
the ADL equates a pro-family,pro-life
position with intolerance. Indeed, Abe Foxman,
executive director of the ADL (left), even charges that
supporting the sanctity of innocent human life creates
"hostility" in which "tolerance and pluralism inevitably
plummet." (63) To equate one's public policy views
with "tolerance" and impugn one's political foes as opposed
to "pluralism" is intellectually dishonest.

The Christian Coalition believes students should be
allowed to exercise their First Amendment right to free
speech, including speech of a religious content. The ADL
says this somehow violates the separation of church and
state. If so, it may have a dispute with President
Clinton as well. In a town hall meeting in Charlotte,
North Carolina, in April 1994, Clinton stated his view that
voluntary prayer does not violate the Constitution:

"Now, it's been carried to such an extent now
where they say, some people have said you can't have a
prayer at a graduation exercise. I personally didn't
agree with that. Why? Because if you're praying at a
graduation exercise or a sporting event, it's a big open
air thing, and no one's being coerced."

"I do not agree that people should not be able to
freely pray and to acknowledge God. We have a chaplain in
Congress, in the Senate and the House." (64)

Does the ADL believe that President Clinton is
undermining pluralism by his opposition to the Lee v.
Weisman decision of 1992 that bans high school graduation
prayer? His position is identical to that of the Christian
Coalition.

We may believe the ADL is wrong about some policy issues,
but unlike the ADL we do not question their right to hold
such views or their commitment to pluralism. And we stand
arm-and-arm with the ADL in giving no quarter to
anti-Semitism or bigotry of any kind.

UNFORTUNATELY, the ADL report has
become part of a highly partisan campaign against religious
folk launched by the national Democratic party. By lending
its name to this campaign against people of faith, the ADL
risks being viewed as an organization driven more by
partisan politics than Jewish concerns.

In August 1993, the Washington-based National Jewish
Democratic Council held a conference to organize a 40-group
coalition to oppose Christian conservatives. Among the
participants were Arthur Kropp, president of People for the
American Way, and Clinton Cabinet members Federico Pena
and Donna Shalala. (65)

Throughout 1993, Lieutenant Governor Don Beyer of
Virginia ran a particularly vicious, bigoted campaign
against Mike Farris, the Republican candidate for
lieutenant governor. Beyer used materials supplied by People
for the American Way which accused Farris of seeking to ban
books such as The Wizard of Oz. The Washington
Post concluded that the charges were false. Michael
Barone of U.S. News and World Report said that
the allegation against Farris "unfairly distorts and
ridicules" his views. (66)

In June of 1994, just days after the ADL released its
report, Representative Vic Fazio (D-CA), chairman of
the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, launched a
new attack on religious conservatives, calling them
"fire-breathing fanatics." The Democratic National Committee
even has set up a bulletin board on Compuserve called
"Radical Right," which contains speeches and other party
documents designed to assault Christians.

U.S. Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders gave a speech
in New York City within weeks of the ADL report's release in
which she referred to religious folk who are conservatives
as "un-Christian." This was a clear assault on the
deeply-held religious beliefs of millions of Americans. All
44 Republicans in the Senate condemned this act of
arch-bigotry in a letter to President Bill Clinton, and 87
members of the House of Representatives called for Elders'
resignation. (67) What was the ADL's reaction to this
act of defamation? Thunderous silence.

The ADL, once a respected civil rights organization, has
aided and abetted a campaign of intolerance against people
of faith with whom they disagree politically. Instead of
calling the Democrats to task for dividing Americans based
on where they go to church or synagogue, the ADL has cast
its own stones.

"It's an old thing in politics," said Representative
Dick Armey of Texas, "Whenever you are trying to get
people's attention, you create a monster out there. So, they
are looking for a bogeymen, and they are hyping the story
that the Republican Party is being taken over by a bunch of
extremists." (68)

"We are in a race between civilization and catastrophe,"
former Education Secretary Bill Bennett said of the
campaign against religious conservatives. "We have record
murder and violent crime rates, huge increases in births to
unwed mothers, educational decline, broken families, and a
president who has established a record of broken promises.
All of this, and we are told that the very religious are
what we must fear. Religion is on the side of civilization;
more people ought to begin to realize it." (69)

THE ADL report is full of
accusations that the Christian Coalition does not support
the separation of church and state. Its sources include
undated flyers passed out at conferences and quotations
lifted out of context -- as well as more unreliable
pseudo-scholarship by Skipp Porteous. It also features
attacks on David Barton, a Texas-based scholar who
has argued that many of America's founders were sympathetic
to Christian values. Most of Barton's work extensively
documents writings of the nation's founders.

The truth is that there is a lively debate about the role
of religion in public life and the meaning of the First
Amendment. The Christian Coalition supports the
Establishment clause prohibiting a state-sponsored church.
It does not support attempts to use the establishment clause
to stifle the free speech rights of Christians, Jews,
Muslims, native Americans, or anyone else.

That is why the Christian Coalition supported the
Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, which overturned
the Supreme Court's 1990 decision in Employment Division v.
Smith. In this decision the Court discarded the "compelling
state interest standard" criteria for judging whether laws
violated rights to free exercise of religion. The ADL
strongly supported this legislation as well.

In the same spirit, the Christian Coalition supports free
speech rights for children in public schools. While we
oppose mandatory prayers composed by school officials, we
believe voluntary, student-initiated prayer is consistent
with First Amendment rights to free speech. While
disagreements over First Amendment issues abound, it is
disingenuous to suggest that those who would allow religious
speech in public schools are ipso facto opposed to
church-state separation. The ADL quotes Pat Robertson as
arguing that the "separation of church and state" is a
"Soviet concept." This quotation is lifted out of context.
Robertson merely noted that the term "separation of church
and state" does not appear in the U.S. Constitution, which
is a statement of fact. The First Amendment specifically
reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof."

Robertson is a strong supporter of the First Amendment.
For example, during his 1988 presidential campaign,
Robertson stated: "I believe absolutely in the separation of
church and state." (70)

In 1991, he said on Larry King Live, "I think it [the
separation of church and state] is far better. You look
at Europe where they have established churches and they are
really dying out. We have a much healthier church here in
America, free from government money. But I don't think the
Constitution requires government to be opposed to religious
faith."(71)

Robertson's words echo those of William O. Douglas
in Zorach v. Clauson (1952). "We are a religious people
whose system of government presupposes a Supreme Being,"
argued Douglas. There was, he added, "no constitutional
requirement which makes it necessary for government to be
hostile to religion and to throw its weight against efforts
to widen the effective scope of religious influence."
(72)

For most of America's history, church pulpits flamed with
sermons about social injustices ranging from slavery and
racism to poverty and the liquor trade. No one suggested
that these activities posed a threat to the separation of
church and state. Americans always have resisted the notion
of a national religion, but embraced faith-based political
movements as an essential counterbalance to social injustice
and government encroachments on liberty.

This is the view of the Christian Coalition. As Ralph
Reed argues in his forthcoming book: "None of this adds up
to the conclusion that America is a 'Christian nation' in
the sense of a theocratic state or a unicultural society.
That not only ignores the enormous contribution that Jews
have made to America, but it is something of an anachronism.
It makes just as much sense to say that Massachusetts is a
Puritan colony or that Maryland is a Catholic state."
(73)

Reed adds, "What religious conservatives want is to
accommodate the historic role of faith in American civic
life. In short, they seek to restore the time-honored
tradition of civil religion -- not to establish Christianity
by law or to create an official church." (74)

"Our agenda, ultimately, of the Christian Coalition,
isn't about theology," Reed said on ABC Nightline recently.
"It is about public policy. We are trying to get public
policy that is more family-friendly. And we think lower
taxes, smaller government, and government that lives within
its means is more family friendly." (75)

THE SUPREME tragedy of the ADL
report is there is a resurgent anti-Semitism across the land
emanating from sources as wide-ranging as the Ku Klux Klan,
former Farrakhan lieutenant Kahlid Abdul Muhammad
(who called New York city "Jew York City"), David Duke,
and some opponents of the Israeli lobby. But an inaccurate,
biased, and politically motivated report like the recent ADL
offering undermines efforts to combat anti-Semitism. By
crying wolf, the ADL endangers its credibility at a time of
rising bigotry and a period of extraordinary delicacy in the
Middle East peace process.

In response to criticism of its report, the ADL has
refused to back off, though it has engaged in some strategic
public relations backpedaling. (76) For its part, the
Christian Coalition will continue to combat anti-Semitism
and religious bigotry in all its ugly forms. It is willing
to seek common ground with Jewish organizations on issues of
mutual concern. The Christian Coalition never will waver
from its steadfast defense of the Jewish people and the
nation of Israel, though it has been unfairly attacked by
the ADL.

"The Jewish community should recognize the depth of
religious faith among Christian evangelicals and treat the
Religious Right with tolerance and respect," urges Marshall
Breger of the Heritage Foundation. (77)

The ADL has displayed neither tolerance nor respect.
Instead, it has engaged in a partisan campaign of innuendo,
half-truths and outright falsehoods.

Sadly, the ultimate losers are not the ADL's
constituency, but all of us, for we desperately need a
legitimate watchdog to combat bigotry. The Anti-Defamation
League has committed defamation, not only against religious
conservatives, but against its own stated purpose.

We earnestly hope the ADL returns to its time-honored and
vital role of ensuring that intolerance has no place in our
civic discourse. For our part -- despite the unfair and
shoddily researched attack by the ADL -- we will remain
vigilant in seeing that anti-Semitism and bigotry does not
rear its monstrous head in our society.

5. Beth Gilinsky, letter to the editor, New
York Post, July 13, 1994 (original in possession of
author).

6. An "annotated" bibliography provides few
specific references. For sources on the Christian Coalition,
for example, the ADL provides vague clues such as this: "The
Los Angeles Times provided a comprehensive account of
San Diego by Barry Horstman (March 22, 1992), and generally
offers reliable West Coast coverage; the Norfolk
Virginian-Pilot, The Freedom Writer, Group Research
Report, People for the American Way's occasional reports and
the group's monthly, Right-Wing Watch, were consulted
frequently." Thus, the reader is supposed to take it on ADL'
s word that its sources are reliable and that the quotations
in the ADL report are accurate. Without specific listings of
sources it is impossible to check many of its
assertions.

36. Dennis King and Chip Berlet, "ADL Gate,"
Tikkun, July/August 1993, p.36. The article describes how
ADL leaders complained to the media about how they had been
sidelined in their efforts to refute Duke's campaign because
of their 501 (c) (3) status. Yet the ADL criticizes other
organizations with the same tax status for not denouncing
the Duke campaign.

48. See, for example: "Christian Coalition NYC
Voter Driver is Multi-Cultural Grassroots Effort," Christian
Coalition press release, April 28, 1993. The New York Times
carried in-depth stories about the Coalition's involvement
in the May 4 elections on April 10, April 16 and April 17.
Other New York media provided similarly detailed
coverage.

70. John Margolis, "Robertson Candidacy on Line in
South Carolina," Chicago Tribune, March 5, 1988.

71. Transcript of CNN's Larry King Live, April 10,
1991.

72. Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952).

73. Reed, working manuscript: p. 126.

74. Ibid.

75. Transcript of ABC's Nightline, June 23,
1994.

76. In a letter to the editor of the New York
Post published on July 13, 1993, Foxman downplays the
ADL report as mere "criticism" and says "a healthy democracy
encourages and depends on the political involvement of
conservative Christians."